GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design

G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design

#19

Radeon RX 5600

MSRP: $229|Avg: $150

98%

#22

Radeon RX 7700

MSRP: $449|Avg: $399

94%

#55

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

206%

#57

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

187%

#58

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

187%

#62

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

170%

#63

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

169%

#65

GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

100%

#66

GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

100%

#68

GeForce GTX 850M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $40

97%

#78

Radeon HD 8970M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $170

92%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GTX 1650 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 24.7% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+24.7%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-24.7%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+0%)
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	—

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $75 versus $100 for the GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design, it costs 25% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 66.3% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+66.3%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅More affordable ($75)	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($100)

Performance Check

Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.

Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

GeForce GTX 1650 Benchmark Check

GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

No prediction data available

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

No prediction data available

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design

GeForce GTX 1650

The GeForce GTX 1650 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 23 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1485 MHz to 1665 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,869 points. Launch price was $149.

GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design

The GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 2 2020. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1035 MHz to 1200 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,309 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design's 6,309 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 24.7%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design uses Turing, both on a 12 nm process. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1,024 (GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2.458 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1200 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design
G3D Mark Score	7,869+25%	6,309
Architecture	Turing	Turing
Process Node	12 nm	12 nm
Shading Units	896	1024+14%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS+21%	2.458 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1665 MHz+39%	1200 MHz
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	56	64+14%
L1 Cache	0.88 MB	1 MB+14%
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design
Upscaling Tech	FSR 2.1 (Compatible)	FSR 2.1 (Compatible)
Frame Generation	FSR 3 (Compatible)	FSR 3 (Compatible)
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR5. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 112 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design) — a 14.3% advantage for the GeForce GTX 1650. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s+14%	112 GB/s
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design
DirectX	12	12 (12_1)
Vulkan	1.4+8%	1.3
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	3	4+33%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs NVENC (Turing) (GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs NVDEC (4th Gen). Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit (GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	NVENC (Turing)
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	NVDEC (4th Gen)
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design's 50W — a 40% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 75°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design
TDP	75W	50W-33%
Recommended PSU	300W-14%	350W
Power Connector	None	PCIe-powered
Length	229mm	—
Height	111mm	—
Slots	2	0-100%
Temp (Load)	70°C-7%	75°C
Perf/Watt	104.9	126.2+20%

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 25% less ($25 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 63.1 (GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 66.2% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2019).